Critical Digital Literacies and the Role of Design

• In Event: 47.094 - Critical Digital Literacies in a "Post-Truth" Era

Abstract

This paper addresses the nature of design and acts of designing in Critical Digital Literacies through a comparative analysis of two research projects. While the idea of design was central to the New London Group’s (1996) manifesto and subsequent work on multiliteracies pedagogies (Cope & Kalantzis, 2009), its meaning today has often become associated with abilities inherent in media production (Dam & Siang, 2018). Dominant models of design thinking tend to represent design as a human-centered but politically “neutral” process, and critical design literacy has yet to be fully developed as a guide for practice (Watkins, 2012). Furthermore, the nature of design as it relates specifically to literacies tends to be downplayed in much current work on making and makerspaces. Analyzing findings across two design-centric research projects, we ultimately demonstrate the value of multidimensional, explicitly critical framing of design as we work to promote literacies in a digital age.

We connect the concepts of multiliteracies (Cope & Kalantzis, 2009; New London Group, 1996), and value-sensitive design (Friedman, Kahn, & Borning, 2002) using a multidimensional framework encompassing content, procedural, and contextual dimensions of digital media experiences (Author 1, 2017, 2018). At the content dimension, we focus on the multimodal elements of design which comprise our experiences of digital media (Holmes, 2013; Serafini, 2012). At the procedural dimension, we consider the underlying rules, operations, and even algorithms that inform our interactions with digital technologies (Hicks, 2017; Noble, 2018). Finally, at the contextual dimension we re-issue the New London Group’s call to emphasize the design of social futures, particularly with regard to the ways that digital technologies shape and are shaped by the experiences of individuals, communities, and institutions (Luke, 2012).

In our comparative analysis, we apply the above perspectives to data drawn from two research studies. The first study analyzed the enactment of design thinking as part of a library-based game-design workshop for youth. The second study examined the literacy demands, practices, and discourses evident in an afterschool computer programming club (Author 1, 2018). Both studies applied a qualitative coding approach to artifactual, observational, and interview data. In comparing these studies, we developed a toolkit of analytical questions that we used to evaluate design literacies as enacted at content, procedural, and contextual dimensions by participants (Gee, 2014b; Author 1, 2017).

Applying our comparative analytical toolkit across studies, we identified several key patterns. At the content dimension, we noted many elements of participants’ enactment of design-in-practice as process as multimodal, recursive, and highly contextualized. At the procedural dimension, we found that across studies, participants questioned, resisted, or reappropriated various design constraints throughout their experiences. Finally, at the contextual dimension, we noted the various roles that interactions with adult facilitators; availability of materials and tools; and background experiences played in shaping these design experiences. Taken together, we argue that these moments present opportunities to redefine the design process and develop a sense of criticality not often emphasized in current design thinking or digital literacy pedagogies.

Authors

• Elisabeth R. Gee, Arizona State University

• Earl Aguilera, California State University - Fresno